Every publication from the Longevity Institute India adheres to rigorous editorial standards. We are transparent about our methods, our sources, and our conflicts. Here are the commitments that guide all our work.
We accept no funding from pharmaceutical companies, supplement manufacturers, or commercial health services. We do not charge for access to our writing. We do not sell products or services. Our only revenue is reader-membership and the personal commitment of our founder.
This means: every recommendation we make is based on our best understanding of the science — not on financial incentives.
Every citation is a live link. Every data point is traceable. Every claim is sourced to peer-reviewed research or disclosed as our own clinical observation. The datasets we build are released publicly under open licenses. Readers should never have to wonder where a claim comes from — the source should be visible, linkable, and verifiable.
This means: skepticism is encouraged. Readers should be able to trace every claim to its source and verify it themselves.
We publish our conflicts of interest. We do not work with pharmaceutical companies. We disclose any personal financial interests in health services or manufacturers. Our founder's financial interests are fully transparent on this site. When we recommend a product or service, we disclose if there is any financial relationship with the provider.
This means: readers know who we are, what we care about, and what might bias our views.
We ask a single, non-negotiable question of every claim we publish: "Is this true for Indian bodies, in Indian contexts?" This is not medical nationalism. It is scientific rigor. We do not accept claims about health, aging, or disease that have been validated only in European or North American populations and simply assumed to apply to us. We test. We verify. We adapt.
This means: we never publish a recommendation that we have not vetted specifically for Indian populations and Indian lives.
When we get something wrong, we say so publicly. We correct the error. We explain how we came to the mistake, and how we have changed our thinking. We do not bury corrections. We do not silently revise old publications. Every published correction remains visible, linked to the original piece.
This means: trust is built through honesty about our mistakes, not through pretending we never make them.
If we conduct research and it finds no effect, we publish the null findings. We do not hide studies because they contradict our hypotheses. We do not bury data that is inconvenient. The science goes where it leads, regardless of whether it supports our prior beliefs.
This means: our work is not a one-sided advocacy, but a genuine search for truth.
We clearly distinguish between what is firmly established, what is probably true, and what is still uncertain. We do not overstate the strength of evidence. We do not claim certainty where uncertainty exists. When the research is mixed, we say so. When protocols are still being tested, we say so.
This means: readers understand what is settled science and what is still frontier research.
All our work undergoes peer review by senior researchers before publication. We maintain a public record of all corrections and retractions. We publish conflict-of-interest disclosures for every author. We release all underlying datasets within one year of publication. And we welcome criticism — from readers, from other researchers, from anyone who finds flaws in our work.
These standards are not nice-to-haves. They are the foundation of our credibility, and the reason readers should trust what we publish.
An independent research institute studying healthspan and lifespan in the South Asian context. Founded by Dr. Deepika Krishna. Open work. Open data. Free, forever.